HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

ATD 2013 - Trading thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-24-2013, 09:17 AM
  #51
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaBoot View Post
So um, what's thr final verdict?

Real life is calling me outside my door and I have to answer.
My guess is you're going to wait awhile.

I think the trade is fine, but others seem to disagree.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:17 AM
  #52
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,507
vCash: 500
Is jafar saying the exact opposite of dreamkur? And both sides are vetoing??

markrander87 is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:20 AM
  #53
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,118
vCash: 500
Boston is making out like bandit, but I'm not in the committee.

EagleBelfour is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:20 AM
  #54
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Funny...I think Dreak considers it lopsided one way, and Jafar the other way. That's what you get when you trade picks in wildly different rounds. This reminds me of my recommendation ages ago that "matching picks" in a trade not be allowed to be more than 4 rounds apart. Nobody but TDMM really paid attention to that proposal, but it was a good one. It would have prevented this foolishness, at least.

I'm with Devil in that I don't have a problem with this trade. I can see from both sides why the GMs might want to do this. Seriously, though, flipping an 8th for a 20th is just an annoying way to design a trade. Couldn't you have come up with something less freakish, VanI? This kind of Mr Bugg carp makes it really hard on the trading committee.

Sturminator is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:21 AM
  #55
Jafar
Keep it logical
 
Jafar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,693
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
Is jafar saying the exact opposite of dreamkur? And both sides are vetoing??
I don't know what dreakmur is saying but in my eyes it's clear that giving up an average 2nd liner in order to boost your 2nd best player isn't something I'm going to approve.

Jafar is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:22 AM
  #56
BubbaBoot
Registered User
 
BubbaBoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Mission Hill
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 10,952
vCash: 500
No really, commerce is calling, I got to get outta here.

BubbaBoot is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:23 AM
  #57
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,118
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jafar View Post
I don't know what dreakmur is saying but in my eyes it's clear that giving up an average 2nd liner in order to boost your 2nd best player isn't something I'm going to approve.
So you think Hershey is getting the best deal? I would say the difference between the 41st and 61st player in this draft is minimal. I see players falling in the 60's every draft that should go 10-15 spot higher.

EagleBelfour is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:26 AM
  #58
Jafar
Keep it logical
 
Jafar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,693
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
So you think Hershey is getting the best deal? I would say the difference between the 41st and 61st player in this draft is minimal. I see players falling in the 60's every draft that should go 10-15 spot higher.
Who wins the deal is kind of irrelevant to me.It sets a precedant that I think is wrong so I'm going to veto it.It is just one vote out of many.

Hershey can easily pick a true n1 defenseman at 43 but can't at 63 , just to lose an average 2nd liner.This is a big differance to me.If you want to boost a your 2nd player then weakening your 3rd , 4th or 5th best player sounds more reasonable than simply giving up on your 8th.

I'm sure it's possible that a trade could boost both team to a point where it's unfair to other team in the draft.I'm sure it is mathematically possible if you take the tiers into account.This is wrong.

Jafar is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:28 AM
  #59
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,507
vCash: 500
Another ATD first. Multiple vetos, but on either side of the coin ha.

markrander87 is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:30 AM
  #60
Jafar
Keep it logical
 
Jafar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,693
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
Another ATD first. Multiple vetos, but on either side of the coin ha.
both teams can win in a trade and the trade could still be bad for the draft.

That's because the value of picks aren't exact with their numerical value.

Jafar is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:31 AM
  #61
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jafar View Post

Hershey can easily pick a true n1 defenseman at 43 but can't at 63 , just to lose an average 2nd liner.This is a big differance to me.If you want to boost a your 2nd player then weakening your 3rd , 4th or 5th best player sounds more reasonable than simply giving up on your 8th.


See that's where you're wrong. I'm not knicking the recent d drafted (al and chris) but is there really that much differece compared to some D available in the 60's.

I look forward to once those picks are made to be able to use actual names.

markrander87 is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:32 AM
  #62
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jafar View Post
both teams can win in a trade and the trade could still be bad for the draft.

That's because the value of picks aren't exact with their numerical value.
That just plain doesn't make sense.

If they gain in one end, they lose on the other. Don't you think?

If

markrander87 is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:33 AM
  #63
Jafar
Keep it logical
 
Jafar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,693
vCash: 50
I can't believe we didn't talk about this with all the preparation we made.

screw life.

Jafar is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:36 AM
  #64
BubbaBoot
Registered User
 
BubbaBoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Mission Hill
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 10,952
vCash: 500
Screw it, I'm pulling out, I gotta go.

Give me the pick.

BubbaBoot is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:37 AM
  #65
BubbaBoot
Registered User
 
BubbaBoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Mission Hill
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 10,952
vCash: 500
I'm going to the draft board and putting my pick in....NOW.

BubbaBoot is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:38 AM
  #66
Jafar
Keep it logical
 
Jafar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,693
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaBoot View Post
Screw it, I'm pulling out, I gotta go.

Give me the pick.
I'm thrilled.

That way we don't have to penalize VanI.

Jafar is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:39 AM
  #67
Jafar
Keep it logical
 
Jafar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,693
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
That just plain doesn't make sense.

If they gain in one end, they lose on the other. Don't you think?

If
I'm saying it's possible for a trade to happen between two teams where both teams benefit from it but that gives them an unfair advantage over the GMs not trading.

I've been told that in my first week in the ATD and I believe it to be true.

And VanI is an experienced GM , he knew this would make a scandal either way.There was no way this trade was just going to pass smoothly.

Jafar is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:41 AM
  #68
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
I'm tempted to veto this, as well, just on general principle.

Sigh...all the effort we put into agreeing on trading rules, and it takes us all of two trades for the circle jerk to begin. We need a rule on how far apart matched pairs of picks (or already selected players in their respective rounds) within a single trade are allowed to be. Otherwise, this whole:

2nd + 8th + 11th +13th

for

1st + 22nd + 23rd +24th

...carp will keep gunking up the draft. These trades are nearly impossible to evaluate rationally, and really do not belong here. This is an old ATD bugbear, and I think it is high time that we put it to sleep.

Sturminator is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:47 AM
  #69
BubbaBoot
Registered User
 
BubbaBoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Mission Hill
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 10,952
vCash: 500
I had a pretty solid game plan on how to go, it was based on various picks that precede mine. I was willing to gamble my 2nd to do so.

It's a moot point now, I've already picked.

Sorry VI.

BubbaBoot is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:50 AM
  #70
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jafar View Post
Who wins the deal is kind of irrelevant to me.It sets a precedant that I think is wrong so I'm going to veto it.It is just one vote out of many.

Hershey can easily pick a true n1 defenseman at 43 but can't at 63 , just to lose an average 2nd liner.This is a big differance to me.If you want to boost a your 2nd player then weakening your 3rd , 4th or 5th best player sounds more reasonable than simply giving up on your 8th.

I'm sure it's possible that a trade could boost both team to a point where it's unfair to other team in the draft.I'm sure it is mathematically possible if you take the tiers into account.This is wrong.
A trade will only be vetoed if it is lopsided. So who wins absolutely does matter.

Edit: I guess it doesn't matter anymore.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:52 AM
  #71
Jafar
Keep it logical
 
Jafar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,693
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
A trade will only be vetoed if it is lopsided. So who wins absolutely does matter.
Fine.

But being confused about who won doesn't necessarily mean the trade is balanced and fair , maybe it is just too wild.

There's also a philosophical difference in evaluating teams from GM to GM , with some preferring balanced teams and others preferring more high end talents.

EDIT: The concept still probably matters.When trades like this happen it'll always make some noise in this thread.


Last edited by Jafar: 01-24-2013 at 09:58 AM.
Jafar is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 09:58 AM
  #72
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
I'm tempted to veto this, as well, just on general principle.

Sigh...all the effort we put into agreeing on trading rules, and it takes us all of two trades for the circle jerk to begin. We need a rule on how far apart matched pairs of picks (or already selected players in their respective rounds) within a single trade are allowed to be. Otherwise, this whole:

2nd + 8th + 11th +13th

for

1st + 22nd + 23rd +24th

...carp will keep gunking up the draft. These trades are nearly impossible to evaluate rationally, and really do not belong here. This is an old ATD bugbear, and I think it is high time that we put it to sleep.
Just like the NHL when they write their CBA; I guess we can't think of everything before it happens.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 10:01 AM
  #73
Jafar
Keep it logical
 
Jafar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,693
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Just like the NHL when they write their CBA; I guess we can't think of everything before it happens.
The same will happen next year , we'll debate every single problem we had in 2013 and new problems will arise.

Jafar is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 10:06 AM
  #74
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,207
vCash: 500
Sooo... I guess the trade doesn't count as a vetoed trade towards the trade limit since Bubba withdrew (and there's no guarantee it would have been vetoed anyway), but in the future I think that if a GM withdraws a trade under threat of veto, it should count towards the limit. The point is not to waste everyone's time.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 10:14 AM
  #75
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Yeah I have no idea what Jafar is talking about here, I think he just kinda vetoed off the cuff automatically and now is just continuing to veto.

I can certainly see why people vetoed this in favor of Boston, but I probably would have been okay with it. Basically, it's the difference between having an upper-half #1 DMan here (#43-#63 is normally a huge run on #1 Ds with some forwards sprinkled in) for a bottom-third #1 DMan and an average 2nd line winger (although I'm 95% sure that VanI wasn't moving up for a D).

With how important #1 DMen are in this thing and how many minutes they play, I probably would have accepted this. As I said, the pick jump here is insanely big so I can see why people vetoed because Boston was getting a lot of picks here. But having said that our job isn't to make everything perfect. If people want to make a trade, our job is only to veto the truly outlandish ones. One thing that would help in that regard I think is if people posted WHY they want to make the trade along with the pick numbers.

Thanks to Bubba Boot for at least being understanding in this mess.

vecens24 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:23 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.